Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GLM-5.2
何時該用哪一個 — 綜合評斷，而非基準測試數據表
輸入不只是文字時選 gemini-3.7-flash：它在文字之外接受影像、音訊和視訊，$0.075 的快取讀取比 glm-5.2 的 $0.143 低約 1.9 倍，輸入基本打平（$0.75 對 $0.77）。需要長單次回覆的純文字工作選 glm-5.2——它的 131072 最大輸出是 gemini-3.7-flash 的 65536 的兩倍，輸出 $2.42 對 $3.75 便宜約 1.5 倍——或者當你想關閉推理時：它支援，而這款 Gemini 不支援。脈絡基本打平，1048576 對 1000000 token。
定價
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 輸入 / 1M tokens | $0.75 | $0.77 | 0.97× |
| 輸出 / 1M tokens | $3.75 | $2.42 | 1.5× |
| 快取讀取 / 1M tokens | $0.075 | $0.143 | 0.52× |
費率取自建置時的即時目錄；各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。
它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下，所有 63 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格（對數尺度）
能力
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具使用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 是 —— 廠商未公布調節參數 | 可配置 |
| 結構化輸出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示快取 | 隱式 + 顯式 | 隱式（自動） |
| 快取生命週期 | 未公開 | 未公開 |
| 最小快取前綴 | 4096 個 token | 未公開 |
規格
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 輸入模態 | 文字 影像 音訊 影片 | 文字 |
| 輸出模態 | 文字 | 文字 |
| 發布日期 | 2026-08-13 | 2026-06-16 |
| 上下文視窗 | 1M | 1M |
| 最大輸出 | 66K | 131K |
| 思考參數 | — |
|
| 可接受的值 | — | thinking.type
reasoning_effort
|
| 預設值 | — | enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it |
規格摘錄自各供應商的文件；供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略，而非自行推測。 完整來源： Gemini 3.7 Flash · GLM-5.2
單一提示詞，兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.
輸出 878 tok (+799 思考) 延遲 6.9 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning means the LLM now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to systematically work through complex problems before producing a final answer. Because our cloud providers bill for these internal processing steps at the same rate as standard output, our billable token volume per query has doubled. While this increases our direct API costs, it drastically reduces error rates and manual review labor, ultimately lowering our total cost per resolved transaction.
輸出 1223 tok (+1138 思考) 延遲 17.1 s
指令遵循（恰好三句，可數）、受眾適配（面向 CFO 的語氣），以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 8/8 cases
Here is the corrected function: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.
輸出 1050 tok (+827 思考) 延遲 6.4 s
GLM-5.2 未命中 · 1/8 cases (fails [1])
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 […]
輸出 4097 tok (+4036 思考) 延遲 58.4 s
修復是否真的正確（可執行）、解釋的資訊密度，以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "withheld" } ```
輸出 918 tok (+858 思考) 延遲 6.2 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld" } ```
輸出 1947 tok (+1893 思考) 延遲 30.9 s
schema 服從度（不臆造欄位）、幻覺壓力（guidance 明確被暫緩給出），以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.
輸出 2858 tok (+2718 思考) 延遲 14.1 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are introducing Caching for our API Gateway, the smartest way to optimize your workflows. Why pay for the exact same response twice? Now, you can automatically store and reuse prompt results across multiple AI providers, drastically reducing latency and overall operational costs. If a user submits a duplicate query, the gateway serves the cached answer instantly, regardless of whether you route to OpenAI, Anthropic, or others. This directly translates to faster applications and significantly lower monthly API bills. You can easily configure your specific caching rules within the developer dashboard and watch your efficiency soar. Stop wasting your valuable tokens on completely redundant computations. Upgrade to the latest gateway version today and experience the future of intelligent prompt management.
輸出 11125 tok (+10984 思考) 延遲 114.8 s
約束服從度（字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句）、文風指紋，以及長度控制。
只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換
以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點，相同的金鑰，相同的請求結構。
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gemini-3.7-flash",
# model="glm-5.2", # 取消註解此行，並註解上一行
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "gemini-3.7-flash",
// model: "glm-5.2", // 取消註解此行，並註解上一行
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "gemini-3.7-flash",
# "model": "glm-5.2", # 取消註解此行，並註解上一行
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "gemini-3.7-flash",
// Model: "glm-5.2", // 取消註解此行，並註解上一行
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("gemini-3.7-flash")
// .model("glm-5.2") // 取消註解此行，並註解上一行
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常見問題
Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GLM-5.2 哪個比較便宜？
Gemini 3.7 Flash 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜（$0.75 對比 $0.77，相差 1.0×）。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊，實際成本取決於您的使用組合。
我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下，對 Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GLM-5.2 進行 A/B 測試嗎？
可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務，並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串，因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 與 GLM-5.2 支援提示快取嗎？
是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率，因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。